Author
Listed:
- Enxue Chang
(Harbin Medical University)
- Haofei Li
(Harbin Medical University)
- Wanji Zheng
(Harbin Medical University)
- Lan Zhou
(Harbin Medical University)
- Yanni Jia
(Harbin Medical University)
- Wen Gu
(Harbin Medical University)
- Yiyin Cao
(Harbin Medical University)
- Xiaoying Zhu
(Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine
The University of Melbourne)
- Juan Xu
(Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shenzhen Center)
- Bo Liu
(Shenzhen Health Capacity Building and Continuing Education Center)
- Mao You
(National Health Development Research Center)
- Kejun Liu
(National Health Development Research Center)
- Mingsi Wang
(Harbin Medical University)
- Weidong Huang
(Harbin Medical University)
Abstract
Objectives This study aimed to systematically assess global economic evaluation studies on COVID-19 vaccination, offer valuable insights for future economic evaluations, and assist policymakers in making evidence-based decisions regarding the implementation of COVID-19 vaccination. Methods Searches were performed from January 2020 to September 2023 across seven English databases (PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EBSCO, KCL-Korean Journal Dataset, SciELO Citation Index, and Derwent Innovations Index) and three Chinese databases (Wanfang Data, China Science and Technology Journal, and CNKI). Rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Data were extracted from eligible studies using a standardized data collection form, with the reporting quality of these studies assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022). Results Of the 40 studies included in the final review, the overall reporting quality was good, evidenced by a mean score of 22.6 (ranging from 10.5 to 28). Given the significant heterogeneity in fundamental aspects among the studies reviewed, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Most of these studies adopted a health system or societal perspective. They predominantly utilized a composite model, merging dynamic and static methods, within short to medium-term time horizons to simulate various vaccination strategies. The research strategies varied among studies, investigating different doses, dosages, brands, mechanisms, efficacies, vaccination coverage rates, deployment speeds, and priority target groups. Three pivotal parameters notably influenced the evaluation results: the vaccine's effectiveness, its cost, and the basic reproductive number (R0). Despite variations in model structures, baseline parameters, and assumptions utilized, all studies identified a general trend that COVID-19 vaccination is cost-effective compared to no vaccination or intervention. Conclusions The current review confirmed that COVID-19 vaccination is a cost-effective alternative in preventing and controlling COVID-19. In addition, it highlights the profound impact of variables such as dose size, target population, vaccine efficacy, speed of vaccination, and diversity of vaccine brands and mechanisms on cost effectiveness, and also proposes practical and effective strategies for improving COVID-19 vaccination campaigns from the perspective of economic evaluation.
Suggested Citation
Enxue Chang & Haofei Li & Wanji Zheng & Lan Zhou & Yanni Jia & Wen Gu & Yiyin Cao & Xiaoying Zhu & Juan Xu & Bo Liu & Mao You & Kejun Liu & Mingsi Wang & Weidong Huang, 2024.
"Economic Evaluation of COVID-19 Immunization Strategies: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis,"
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 457-470, July.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00880-6
DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00880-6
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00880-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.